Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Purpose To explain how social enterprises coordinate circular organics recovery in regional settings where formal infrastructure is incomplete and institutional support remains thin. Design/methodology/approach A qualitative, abductive multiple-case study of two Australian organics recovery arrangements, drawing on 26 semi-structured interviews, site observations, documentary sources and iterative tracing of material flows and coordination over time. Findings Circular coordination developed through four overlapping phases: initiation, stabilisation, legitimation and institutionalisation. Repeated routines and micro-infrastructure, supported by relationship-based brokerage, made recovery workable amid structural, socio-political and emergent complexity. Supply-chain championing was centralised in SoilCo and decentralised in CoffeeCos, but remained active across the full process. Greater visibility strengthened legitimacy and formalisation while also creating new scrutiny and operating burdens, including competition for previously unwanted material. Research limitations/implications The study prioritises analytical depth in two Australian organics recovery cases. Research across other materials and institutional settings could test the scope and boundary conditions of accidental supply chains. Practical implications Regional circularity requires investment in coordination and relationship-based governance, as well as low-capital storage and consolidation alongside major infrastructure. Social implications Regional organics recovery can generate locally visible environmental and community benefits by connecting waste generators with local users. Sustaining these benefits depends on trust, participation and place-based coordination across the pathway. Originality/value The article conceptualises accidental supply chains as a distinct organising mode in which deliberate local action produces a recognisable supply architecture through repeated practice without prior blueprinting.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Quintana-Smark et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: